Allowed

Bimal Chandra Das v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC11 Jan 2021WPA/239/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired teacher, sought interest on delayed gratuity and arrear pension due to administrative delay despite filing a writ petition considerably late. The High Court ordered payment of interest at a specified rate from the date of retirement and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

To pay interest @ 8% per annum on gratuity and arrear pension calculated from 01.03.2004 till date of payment within eight weeks.

Bimal Chandra Das Vs State of West Bengal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

11.01.2021 adeb Sl. 116 Ct. 15

¶2

W.P.A. 239 of 2021

¶3

Bimal Chandra Das

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶6

Ms. Moumi Yasmin

¶7

……..For the Petitioner

¶8

Mr. Mila Kumar Maity

¶9

..For the State

¶10

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today is kept with the record.

¶11

The petitioner was a Teacher of a Primary School, South 24 Parganas, who retired on 28.02.2004. He had completed all his pension-related formalities prior to his retirement. However, the concerned authorities delayed and released his gratuity and arrear pension amount on 01.08.2005. The petitioner herein seeks interest to be paid on the gratuity and arrear pension amount for the interim period of delay in receipt of the gratuity and arrear pension amount.

¶12

There is a considerable delay in filing of the writ petition, which the petitioner seeks to justify by stating that there is no statutory period of limitation and neither parties have suffered due to this delay. It is the submission of the petitioner that accordingly the petition should be allowed. The petitioner relies upon an order in W.P. 17557 (W) of 2017 ( Narayan Chandra Saha Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) wherein a co-ordinate bench had relied upon the Supreme Court judgement in the case of Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh, reported in (2008) 8 S.C.C. 648 on the issue of limitation relating to payment or re-fixation of pay or pension wherein the Apex Court had held that relief

¶13

¶14

may be granted in spite of delay as it does not affect the rights of the third party.

¶15

In view of the above and after hearing the learned Counsel for both parties, I direct the Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal as also the concerned Treasury Officer to pay interest to the petitioner @ 8% per annum on the gratuity and arrear pension amount calculated from 01.03.2004 till the date of payment. Such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

¶16

This writ petition is disposed of, however, no order as to costs.

¶17

Since no affidavit is called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied.

¶18

Urgent photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties on urgent basis.

¶19

(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.)

Bimal Chandra Das v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bimal Chandra Das v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tapan Kumar Jash and Ors. Vs the Visva Bharati and Ors.

Debasish Mitra Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Debasish Mitra Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Amar Chandra Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Amarchandra Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dhananjay Samanta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.